ssd drives - reliable?

ushere wrote on 11/27/2011, 8:38 PM
finally thinking about one for boot drive, but are they reliable enough?

simple yes / no answer will suffice - or perhaps drives to be avoid?

tia

Comments

mekelly wrote on 11/27/2011, 8:49 PM
Absolutely. You need to back it up nightly just like every other boot drive but I've had a Vertex 2 for a year with zero issues.

Single biggest performance enhancement I've made to my system. Could never go back to a spinning boot drive!
Hulk wrote on 11/27/2011, 8:53 PM
Yes reliable. Especially Intel or something like Crucial M4.

Avoid Sandforce controllers. i.e. OCZ SSD's
Guitartoys wrote on 11/27/2011, 10:56 PM
Sorry to disagree, but I love OCZ drives I have vertex 2 and 3 in several computers. I've tried other flavors but not IBM, which I hear good things about.

They are fast, you will them.

M
Hulk wrote on 11/27/2011, 11:05 PM
OZC with the Sandforce controller have had all sorts of problems. Perhaps they've fixed it, perhaps not. But there are many, many people who have had them and avoid them at all costs. Do a little searching. Here's one source:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4973/sandforce-identifies-firmware-bug-causing-bsod-issue-fix-available-today
PeterDuke wrote on 11/28/2011, 12:34 AM
"You need to back it up nightly just like every other boot drive"

Why back up nightly?

All your data is on real drives, isn't it? In that case, you only need to backup your boot drive after you have installed or uninstalled something.
apit34356 wrote on 11/28/2011, 12:41 AM
ssd drives are the way to go for fast thru-put..... but a lot of ssd's can suffer write speeds issues, but then some new ssd's are now using smart large cache to balance writing/reading speed issues.

Tom's Hardware site, one of many pc sites around, has a review of some the new ssd's, check it out. On a side note, ssd's are taking over big server farms and supercomputing systems.
Dan Sherman wrote on 11/28/2011, 7:20 AM
I have a solid state operations "C" drive
No toubles so far.
It's been three months or so.
Steve Mann wrote on 11/28/2011, 8:59 AM
I use a 60Gb SSD internally as a scratch drive when I need speed.

Another PC here has a Gigabyte Z68XP-UD3 which uses the Intel Hybrid EFI technology. I don't have an SSD on that machine yet, but it is supposed to deliver the best of both HDD and SSD.
Chanimal wrote on 11/28/2011, 9:11 AM
I have had the Patriot 128 GB SSD for the last 2 years--works great. I had an error once, but it never happened again after I re-booted. One thing--make sure you find all the unique settings to use once you setup Windows. For example, you do not want to optimize an SSD drive and there are a LOT of other tweeks. I found a youtube video that walked me through ALL of the tweeks and unique settings when I first set it up. I only run my programs on it but re-setup all my document folders to another drive (so there would be plenty of space).

Also, avoid writing and erasing (i.e., copying files to your desktop--use another drive), since it will start to slow the drive down a lot later. Mine is slower than origionally (but still faster than my black caviar drives) so I have to run the utility on it (but I need to backup the entire drive before hand).

mekelly wrote on 11/28/2011, 1:53 PM
PeterDuke,

Yep, I keep my data on a separate drive but there are plenty of files written to your system drive even without installing/uninstalling any programs. Can you restore an older backup without much consequence, usually yes.

But, I like to know I have an exact snapshot of my system drive every night. A differential backup takes about 20-40 seconds on my system.

So, for about 30 seconds a night, I know I can restore to exactly the same state.
TheRhino wrote on 11/28/2011, 3:17 PM
We're using the 60GB Vertex 2 SSDs as boot drives for all of our workstations and the only drive in all of our laptops. (60GB keeps people from loading their own junk on the laptop - hah!) Haven't had any problems in over 1.5 years. IMO the best feature besides fast boot times is how fast we can backup the drive.

Workstation C with $600 USD of upgrades in April, 2021
--$360 11700K @ 5.0ghz
--$200 ASRock W480 Creator (onboard 10G net, TB3, etc.)
Borrowed from my 9900K until prices drop:
--32GB of G.Skill DDR4 3200 ($100 on Black Friday...)
Reused from same Tower Case that housed the Xeon:
--Used VEGA 56 GPU ($200 on eBay before mining craze...)
--Noctua Cooler, 750W PSU, OS SSD, LSI RAID Controller, SATAs, etc.

Performs VERY close to my overclocked 9900K (below), but at stock settings with no tweaking...

Workstation D with $1,350 USD of upgrades in April, 2019
--$500 9900K @ 5.0ghz
--$140 Corsair H150i liquid cooling with 360mm radiator (3 fans)
--$200 open box Asus Z390 WS (PLX chip manages 4/5 PCIe slots)
--$160 32GB of G.Skill DDR4 3000 (added another 32GB later...)
--$350 refurbished, but like-new Radeon Vega 64 LQ (liquid cooled)

Renders Vegas11 "Red Car Test" (AMD VCE) in 13s when clocked at 4.9 ghz
(note: BOTH onboard Intel & Vega64 show utilization during QSV & VCE renders...)

Source Video1 = 4TB RAID0--(2) 2TB M.2 on motherboard in RAID0
Source Video2 = 4TB RAID0--(2) 2TB M.2 (1) via U.2 adapter & (1) on separate PCIe card
Target Video1 = 32TB RAID0--(4) 8TB SATA hot-swap drives on PCIe RAID card with backups elsewhere

10G Network using used $30 Mellanox2 Adapters & Qnap QSW-M408-2C 10G Switch
Copy of Work Files, Source & Output Video, OS Images on QNAP 653b NAS with (6) 14TB WD RED
Blackmagic Decklink PCie card for capturing from tape, etc.
(2) internal BR Burners connected via USB 3.0 to SATA adapters
Old Cooler Master CM Stacker ATX case with (13) 5.25" front drive-bays holds & cools everything.

Workstations A & B are the 2 remaining 6-core 4.0ghz Xeon 5660 or I7 980x on Asus P6T6 motherboards.

$999 Walmart Evoo 17 Laptop with I7-9750H 6-core CPU, RTX 2060, (2) M.2 bays & (1) SSD bay...

LReavis wrote on 11/28/2011, 5:45 PM
I've used SSDs for several years now as boot disks - probably the best single upgrade I've ever done.

Reliable? Not in my experience. My Dane-elec (rebranded first generation Intel SSD) died after a year or so, and had no warranty. I never knew why it died.

My original Intel X25 80 gig second generation SSD died when a nearby lightning strike fried it. My computer was being powered by a UPS that provided 100% battery power, so nothing else in the computer died - leading me to believe that it was the intense electromagnetic field that killed the SSD, not a power line surge.

Intel replaced the fried SSD in just a few days, no questions asked. So be sure to get a brand that has a good warranty.

Speed? Almost zero seek time means really fast boot up and same for opening programs. Much better than any spinning disk that I have had, especially after lots of programs are installed in the OS.

Read speed on the Intel (this one is over a year old, and 90% full - I need to do a disk clean up) also is pretty good. I just checked mine with ATTO Disk Benchmark, looking at 8 different file sizes that range from 64 KB to 8192 KB. Read speed was only 140,029 MB/sec. for the 64-KB file size; but all of the others exceeded 260,000 MB/sec. My fastest 7200 rpm disk, less than half full, is not even half as fast.

Write speeds are just so-so, ranging from 51,501 up to 88,301 - not as fast as my 5400 Samsung 2tb drive.
PeterDuke wrote on 11/28/2011, 7:22 PM
@mekelly,
Do whatever you feel necessary so that you can sleep at night. The same principle applies to risk taking and financial investments.